Coalition brings redistricting reform proposal to Rhinelander

Approximately 40 people gathered at ArtStart in Rhinelander late last month to hear about a plan to permanently end gerrymandering in Wisconsin by establishing an independent commission to draw voting district maps.

Representatives from the Fair Maps Coalition of Wisconsin presented their draft proposal advocating for the creation of an Independent Redistricting Commission (IRC) at an Oct. 23 community hearing hosted by the League of Women Voters of the Northwoods.

While the state’s voters have been fairly evenly split between the two major political parties since 2010, the legislature has been overwhelmingly Republican, explained Nicole Gabrail, the coalition’s volunteer and relational organizer. Jane Benson and former state legislator Penny Bernard Schaber joined Gabrail in leading the presentation, which traced Wisconsin’s redistricting history back to 1971. That was the last time the state saw bipartisan cooperation in drawing district maps, the speakers said. Since then, decades of partisan battles have resulted in federal courts repeatedly being called upon to draw Wisconsin’s maps. A slide shown early in the presentation read “Gerrymandering is a bipartisan disease,” a quote from a member of the coalition meant to emphasize that both parties will gerrymander to entrench political power if given the opportunity.

According to the presenters, a turning point came in 2010, when Republicans gained control of both chambers of the state legislature and drew maps that created what advocates called an extreme gerrymander. In 2022, more voters statewide chose Democrats, yet Democrats lost seats in both the state assembly and senate. The landscape changed again in 2023 when the Wisconsin Supreme Court declared the existing maps unconstitutional based on non-contiguity — districts that weren’t physically connected. Governor Tony Evers’ maps were ultimately adopted in February 2024. The 2024 election results showed the impact: compared to 2022’s lopsided representation, the legislature now reflects Wisconsin’s “purple” nature more accurately, with the Senate shifting from 22-11 Republican to 18-15.

“Because we have maps that allow us to have more balance, we have to do it now,” Schaber stressed.

Without a permanent solution in place before the 2030 census, Wisconsin could return to extreme partisan maps, the speakers warned.

The coalition’s proposal draws from successful models in Arizona, California, Colorado, and Michigan — the only four states with truly independent redistricting commissions written into their constitutions.

Here’s how it would work:

Commissioner Selection: The Department of Administration would send applications to at least 10,000 randomly selected registered voters. After screening for completeness and eligibility, 240 applicants would be randomly selected. From those, nine commissioners would be chosen randomly, representing Democrats, Republicans, and unaffiliated voters. Those nine would then select six additional commissioners, maintaining party balance across all regions of the state. Three reserve commissioners would also be designated.
Requirements: Commissioners cannot be candidates, current state legislators, or political party leaders. They must be registered voters and independent from partisan politics.

Structure: The 15-member commission would include Democrats, Republicans, and unaffiliated voters. Commissioners would receive training, compensation, and support staff. The commission would elect its own chair and vice chair.

Decision-Making: Most decisions require a simple majority of eight votes. Major decisions like hiring experts or removing commissioners require 10 votes including representation from each party affiliation. Final map approval requires 10 votes including two Democrats, two Republicans, and two unaffiliated commissioners.

Public Input: Two rounds of public hearings would be held — before maps are drawn and after draft maps are completed. At least one hearing would be held in each region, with virtual options available. All submissions would become public records.

Map Criteria: The commission must follow federal and state constitutional requirements, including equal population, contiguity, compactness, respect for communities of interest, and partisan fairness measured by mathematical metrics.

Legislative Role: The Wisconsin legislature would have three chances to approve the final maps by August 15. If no agreement is reached, the Wisconsin Supreme Court would make the final decision — a shift from the federal courts that have historically intervened.

The coalition estimates the first cycle would cost approximately $4 million over the 10-year period between censuses, with future cycles adjusted for inflation. The budget would cover commissioner compensation, expert consultants, public hearings, and administrative costs.

“When you think about all the lawsuits over those decades, $4 million is small by comparison,” Schaber said.

The proposal was submitted to the state legislature on October 16, at a press conference at the State Capitol in Madison. The coalition’s timeline is ambitious: finalize the proposal this fall, secure bipartisan legislative support, pass the IRC legislation, and then work toward a constitutional amendment — all before the 2030 census when voting maps will be redrawn.

While the initial legislation would establish the IRC, a constitutional amendment is necessary to fully remove the legislature from the map-drawing process. Wisconsin’s Constitution currently requires the legislature to have authority over redistricting.

“The amendment is really going to work towards giving the independent redistricting commission full authority to approve, to draw, approve and enact the maps,” explained Benson.

Constitutional amendments in Wisconsin must pass in two consecutive legislative sessions before going to voters for approval — a high bar, but one that would make the IRC permanent and harder to reverse.

Several attendees asked about Iowa’s redistricting system, which has been held up as a model for nonpartisan map-drawing.

The presenters explained that while Iowa’s system works well, it has a critical flaw: the legislature can override the commission’s decisions. Additionally, Iowa’s geography — with square counties — differs significantly from Wisconsin’s irregular county boundaries.

Attendees expressed both enthusiasm and skepticism. One resident asked why they should be optimistic given the legislature’s recent history of gaveling in and out without addressing issues they don’t want to discuss.

Schaber acknowledged the concern but pointed to the changed landscape since the 2024 election. She added that the 2026 Senate election could potentially shift control, making it even more important to have the IRC proposal ready.

The Fair Maps Coalition is holding community hearings throughout Wisconsin to gather public feedback on the proposal. The draft proposal is available at FairMapsWI.com, where residents can also submit questions and comments.